KT and i talked about preload a bit and my thoughts for what they are worth are
, for every bit of preload you put in for traction it will reverse itself when
you unload the chassis or worse under braking. Worked that way in drag cars for
me anyway. Joe Timney is the guy to get a sensible opinion from though as he has
much more experience.
Dave
Bill & Dee Bennett wrote:
>
> Here is something that has perked my interest for months. The ability to get
> traction at Bonneville seems to be one the keys at making a good run. The
> idea of using a four link system seems to be fairly common. To me this would
> be fine as long as you were constantly accelerating. The force is there to
> make this type of suspension work. The four link system has a variety of
> adjustments that can be complicated in obtaining the proper setup. By
> changing instant center position anti-squat can be changed to control front
> end lift and how hard the tires are hit. Once you reach the top of each gear
> G forces start decreasing, the forces available for traction are now lower.
> It seems the 4 links just doesn't allow for 100% use of the motor having to
> leave something on the table for traction.
> Now Keith has mentioned the use of a 3 link or torque link type
> suspension. This is one I am more familiar with having hung around the dirt
> circle tracks for years. It can be just as complicated as the 4 link to
> setup. The 3rd link attachment point can be one of the most important as it
> not only controls acceleration, but also braking. The front of the 3rd link
> is decoupled from the frame by a spring loaded slider or rubber doughnut to
> prevent wheel hop during braking. Even with one less bar to adjust you are
> still trying to achieve they same goal. To arrive at the proper instant
> center point without creating to much front end lift while creating enough
> rear end down force to gain traction.
> Let me throw one out to the list that I haven't seen, but no doubt that
> someone smarter than me has tried. Why not replace to top 3rd link with a
> wishbone common to four link systems. The wishbone would have a longer than
> normal center piece and coupled to the frame similar to a 3 link. The rear
> attachments would be vertically inline with the lower arm attachment points.
> This would allow doing away with the diagonal link or panhard bar. Also you
> would have the ability to preload the right and left sides separately.
> Granted the gains maybe no more then the 4 link or torque link, and the
> setup a real bear. Overall size may be too much for some vehicles. Has
> anyone ever seen a setup similar to this and does it work?
>
> My take on the whole thing is that until someone rewrites the laws of
> physics it will always be a struggle to balance out creating rear wheel
> down force without creating lift.
>
> Bill
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe land-speed
///
///
|